Ashley Weber, Annotation #7, Date: 10/3/10 The Cove
Film, Director, Release Year
The documentary The Cove was directed by Louie Psihoyos and released in 2009.
What is the central argument or narrative of the film?
The focus of this film takes place in Taijii, Japan, a little town with a big secret. Here a secret cove where no one can see is the location of the annual dolphin hunt and slaying. Migrating dolphins are herded into this cove where netted and killed by the means of spheres and knives in small fish boats.
The movie takes us to this location where animal activists including Ric O’Barry, the dolphin trainer of Flipper, set out to expose the truth behind this revenue generating business of selling dolphins. O’Barry himself went through a life changing experience that he uses to help keep Dolphins out of captivity. Throughout the documentary, viewers learn how these horrible actions can remain hidden and why they are happening.
What sustainability problems does the film draw out?
Sustainability problems exist in both the way dolphins are kept out of their natural environment as well as the inhumane annual dolphin huntings that are occurring in Japan.
-Ric O’Barry mentions in the film that “a dolphin’s smile is nature’s greatest deception.” Dolphins are captured form their habitat and placed in artificial living environments such as aquariums where they are not happy. The film mentions the case of a specific aquarium in Baltimore where dolphins kept dying and they couldn’t figure out why. They discovered that the filtration system being used was to loud causing the animals to be uncomfortable leading to their death.
-Ric O’Barry blames himself for the world’s love of these wonderful creatures. He claims the Flipper tv series created desire to love, kiss, and swim with dolphins. This desire helped take dolphins out of the ocean and into tanks to put on shows, which fuels the business.
-Along with aquarium’s desire for these revenue producing creatures, the people in Japan are also motivated by the revenue generated selling dolphins to aquariums and the others sold as meat. Keep The captivity industry is staying alive because it is rewarding the fisherman.
-Japan’s government also has many issues that fuel this type of behavior. These fishermen have been told by the government that dolphins are eating too much fish which is harmful to the oceans. So in a way they are performing pest control on the ocean. Under the IWC dolphins and porpoises are not protected because they are not categorized as whales. Japan’s leaders and representatives at these world meetings have mentioned that there is no evidence to why this species is so special.
-Other loopholes in the laws of the city of Taijii were very prevalent. Outside of this city most Japanese were not aware that dolphins were being killed or even that they were eaten as a food which is also dangerous because of the high levels of mercury. In this town, the dolphin activists were followed around once they set foot in the town. They were questioned, physically and verbally harassed for trying to uncover their secret. The fisherman were trying anything they could to get the visitors to commit a small crime to bring them to jail where they could be kept for 28 days without good reason. Here they would have been beaten until confessed to a crime, which would make them unable to come back ever again.
What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why?
This documentary is one of the most persuasive and compelling films because viewers are taken along for the ride in which the daring visitors are working to uncover and expose this environmental issue.
Viewers get to see firsthand the resistance and efforts the city of Taijii goes through to protect their secret involving 24 hour surveillance and following, questioning interviews, and verbal harassment. The instance when the group went into the area late at night to hide camera’s to catch them in the act was very nerve racking to watch that it made you feel the nervousness they must have felt.
The visual footage caught from these cameras was outstanding and very graphic. Just watching the spears killing the dolphins and the cove becoming completely red was a horrifying sight to see. Watching the women activist crying because she had to watch the dolphins being slain right infront of her own eyes was gut wrenching.
Last but not least was the filming of the meetings held involving the protection of dolphins. To actually see and listen to Japan’s representative make remarks about how dolphin killings were necessary and there was nothing special about this species left me speechless. Actually see all the incorrect facts and opinions come out of his mouth made it much more persuasive.
What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by? Why?
I thought the whole film was very compelling because almost everything was backed up by actual footage of what was occurring. Although I think it is hard to believe that many Japanese are unaware of this animal cruelty actually happening because of the strong footage showing Japan’s representative at the IWC meetings feel strongly for this type of behavior and he is supposed to represent view of whole country. What audiences does the film best address? Why?
The effectiveness and overall quality of this film allows the potential audience range to be wide. It would be most effective and compelling to those college age and older viewers who are unaware of the current dolphin killing issues in Japan. This would be effective to be shown to aquarium owners and trainers to just listen to Ric O’Barry’s. He trained dolphin’s until he had this break through realization that what he was doing was actually harmful and maybe the current trainers haven’t come to this realization yet. What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental educational value?
Prior to watching this film, I was unaware of this issue of annual dolphin hunting. I was also not familiar with the IWC, International Whaling Commission. It would have been educational to have more of an overview of what the IWC does and past environmental stances the group has had. It would also be interesting to know what stances other countries take on the issues that arise. The film mentioned most were in complete opposition to Japan’s stance, but it lacked details as to why the majority couldn’t punish the Japanese. What kinds of action and points of intervention are suggested by the film? If the film itself does not suggest corrective action, describe actions that you can imagine being effective.
This film does an excellent job of showing how exposing environmental issues can bring awareness to people. However, the life risking behavior involved to perform this exposure would seem too overwhelming for most people to think of doing. Although the group didn’t physically save the dolphins, the exposure of the issue is one of the best ways of possible intervention. The film also has many celebrities endorse the film which provides even more exposure to the film and the issue at hand. provides a hotline to call to make more of a direct action on an individual level. What additional information has this film compelled you to seek out? (Provide at least two supporting references.)
After watching this film, I was compelled to research more about the IWC and Japanese stances.
I found a map showing whaling conservation countries and proponent countries. It was very disturbing seeing the big red area of countries in support. http://www.greenpeace.org.au/blog/energy/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/iwc-member-states-whale-conservation-countries-vs-pro-whalin_1.pdf
I came across a website for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan and found some very interesting material about their stance on the management of whales. Below are a few quotes found on this subject which obviously show that Japan feels they are doing the right thing and the IWC which is often against them is wrong.
- “Mutual acknowledgment of distinct cultures is critically important. Many countries, including Japan, have a traditional food culture based upon consumption of marine products.” - “INTRODUCING OPINIONS OF INTERNATIONAL LEGAL EXPERTS to correct questionable decisions of the IWC” - “ENFORCING CURRENT REGULATIONS of the IWC as a responsible contracting party, although some of the past IWC decisions are still legally questionable.” http://www.mofa.go.jp/policy/economy/fishery/whales/japan.html
Whaling was banned in 1986 because many species were nearly extinct. Three countries in the IWC still hunt today: Japan, Norway and Iceland. The IWC is currently working on a new proposal that has very close to being agreed upon besides Japan. Japan’s statement was “We do have evidence that the whale stock is sustainable if it is contained under a certain level of catch” and that “Other countries had insisted on an end to whaling in the Antarctic, which was not justified by science.” http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10422957
The Cove
Film, Director, Release Year
The documentary The Cove was directed by Louie Psihoyos and released in 2009.
What is the central argument or narrative of the film?
The focus of this film takes place in Taijii, Japan, a little town with a big secret. Here a secret cove where no one can see is the location of the annual dolphin hunt and slaying. Migrating dolphins are herded into this cove where netted and killed by the means of spheres and knives in small fish boats.
The movie takes us to this location where animal activists including Ric O’Barry, the dolphin trainer of Flipper, set out to expose the truth behind this revenue generating business of selling dolphins. O’Barry himself went through a life changing experience that he uses to help keep Dolphins out of captivity. Throughout the documentary, viewers learn how these horrible actions can remain hidden and why they are happening.
What sustainability problems does the film draw out?
Sustainability problems exist in both the way dolphins are kept out of their natural environment as well as the inhumane annual dolphin huntings that are occurring in Japan.
-Ric O’Barry mentions in the film that “a dolphin’s smile is nature’s greatest deception.” Dolphins are captured form their habitat and placed in artificial living environments such as aquariums where they are not happy. The film mentions the case of a specific aquarium in Baltimore where dolphins kept dying and they couldn’t figure out why. They discovered that the filtration system being used was to loud causing the animals to be uncomfortable leading to their death.
-Ric O’Barry blames himself for the world’s love of these wonderful creatures. He claims the Flipper tv series created desire to love, kiss, and swim with dolphins. This desire helped take dolphins out of the ocean and into tanks to put on shows, which fuels the business.
-Along with aquarium’s desire for these revenue producing creatures, the people in Japan are also motivated by the revenue generated selling dolphins to aquariums and the others sold as meat. Keep The captivity industry is staying alive because it is rewarding the fisherman.
-Japan’s government also has many issues that fuel this type of behavior. These fishermen have been told by the government that dolphins are eating too much fish which is harmful to the oceans. So in a way they are performing pest control on the ocean. Under the IWC dolphins and porpoises are not protected because they are not categorized as whales. Japan’s leaders and representatives at these world meetings have mentioned that there is no evidence to why this species is so special.
-Other loopholes in the laws of the city of Taijii were very prevalent. Outside of this city most Japanese were not aware that dolphins were being killed or even that they were eaten as a food which is also dangerous because of the high levels of mercury. In this town, the dolphin activists were followed around once they set foot in the town. They were questioned, physically and verbally harassed for trying to uncover their secret. The fisherman were trying anything they could to get the visitors to commit a small crime to bring them to jail where they could be kept for 28 days without good reason. Here they would have been beaten until confessed to a crime, which would make them unable to come back ever again.
What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why?
This documentary is one of the most persuasive and compelling films because viewers are taken along for the ride in which the daring visitors are working to uncover and expose this environmental issue.
Viewers get to see firsthand the resistance and efforts the city of Taijii goes through to protect their secret involving 24 hour surveillance and following, questioning interviews, and verbal harassment. The instance when the group went into the area late at night to hide camera’s to catch them in the act was very nerve racking to watch that it made you feel the nervousness they must have felt.
The visual footage caught from these cameras was outstanding and very graphic. Just watching the spears killing the dolphins and the cove becoming completely red was a horrifying sight to see. Watching the women activist crying because she had to watch the dolphins being slain right infront of her own eyes was gut wrenching.
Last but not least was the filming of the meetings held involving the protection of dolphins. To actually see and listen to Japan’s representative make remarks about how dolphin killings were necessary and there was nothing special about this species left me speechless. Actually see all the incorrect facts and opinions come out of his mouth made it much more persuasive.
What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by? Why?
I thought the whole film was very compelling because almost everything was backed up by actual footage of what was occurring. Although I think it is hard to believe that many Japanese are unaware of this animal cruelty actually happening because of the strong footage showing Japan’s representative at the IWC meetings feel strongly for this type of behavior and he is supposed to represent view of whole country.
What audiences does the film best address? Why?
The effectiveness and overall quality of this film allows the potential audience range to be wide. It would be most effective and compelling to those college age and older viewers who are unaware of the current dolphin killing issues in Japan. This would be effective to be shown to aquarium owners and trainers to just listen to Ric O’Barry’s. He trained dolphin’s until he had this break through realization that what he was doing was actually harmful and maybe the current trainers haven’t come to this realization yet.
What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental educational value?
Prior to watching this film, I was unaware of this issue of annual dolphin hunting. I was also not familiar with the IWC, International Whaling Commission. It would have been educational to have more of an overview of what the IWC does and past environmental stances the group has had. It would also be interesting to know what stances other countries take on the issues that arise. The film mentioned most were in complete opposition to Japan’s stance, but it lacked details as to why the majority couldn’t punish the Japanese.
What kinds of action and points of intervention are suggested by the film? If the film itself does
not suggest corrective action, describe actions that you can imagine being effective.
This film does an excellent job of showing how exposing environmental issues can bring awareness to people. However, the life risking behavior involved to perform this exposure would seem too overwhelming for most people to think of doing. Although the group didn’t physically save the dolphins, the exposure of the issue is one of the best ways of possible intervention. The film also has many celebrities endorse the film which provides even more exposure to the film and the issue at hand. provides a hotline to call to make more of a direct action on an individual level.
What additional information has this film compelled you to seek out? (Provide at least two supporting references.)
After watching this film, I was compelled to research more about the IWC and Japanese stances.
I found a map showing whaling conservation countries and proponent countries. It was very disturbing seeing the big red area of countries in support.
http://www.greenpeace.org.au/blog/energy/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/iwc-member-states-whale-conservation-countries-vs-pro-whalin_1.pdf
I came across a website for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan and found some very interesting material about their stance on the management of whales. Below are a few quotes found on this subject which obviously show that Japan feels they are doing the right thing and the IWC which is often against them is wrong.
- “Mutual acknowledgment of distinct cultures is critically important. Many countries, including Japan, have a traditional food culture based upon consumption of marine products.”
- “INTRODUCING OPINIONS OF INTERNATIONAL LEGAL EXPERTS to correct questionable decisions of the IWC”
- “ENFORCING CURRENT REGULATIONS of the IWC as a responsible contracting party, although some of the past IWC decisions are still legally questionable.”
http://www.mofa.go.jp/policy/economy/fishery/whales/japan.html
Whaling was banned in 1986 because many species were nearly extinct. Three countries in the IWC still hunt today: Japan, Norway and Iceland. The IWC is currently working on a new proposal that has very close to being agreed upon besides Japan. Japan’s statement was “We do have evidence that the whale stock is sustainable if it is contained under a certain level of catch” and that “Other countries had insisted on an end to whaling in the Antarctic, which was not justified by science.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10422957